


A Song Of Ice And Fire revisited: a thesis submitted to fulfil requirements for the degree of Maester of Philosophy, 921 AC

by GilShalos1



Category: Game of Thrones (TV)
Genre: Complete, Gen, Parody, Spoilers, characters are talked about but not present
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2019-05-26
Updated: 2019-05-28
Packaged: 2020-03-17 14:58:27
Rating: Teen And Up Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 10
Words: 5,147
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/18967570
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/GilShalos1/pseuds/GilShalos1
Summary: With the recent change in regime, the discovery of a virtually intact cache of raven scrolls left in the now-abandoned Castle Black, and the decision of Lord Gendry Baratheon XVIII to open his family’s archive of correspondence to researchers, the time is right to re-examine the events of 297 – 305 AC in the light of new information about the motivations and decisions of key actors.This thesis will prove that “A Song Of Ice And Fire” is, rather than an objective account of the events that led to the reign of King Brandon Stark (or, as he was referred to in less enlightened times, “King Bran the Broken”), in fact a piece of propaganda designed to legitimise Stark rule and containing a number of blatant fictions as well as a pervasive bias.





	1. THE BEGINNING OF THE GREAT SUCCESSION CRISIS

**Author's Note:**

> This was originally inspired by a thread on r/asoiaf in which healthcare-analyst-1 suggested that since “Game of Thrones” was based on “A Song of Ice and Fire” and we see at the end of 8.06 that “A Song of Ice and Fire” was produced under the first Stark king, it might have been biased Stark propaganda to legitimise their rule (as often happened in reality). I also owe a debt to reddit users HoldthisL_28-3 (for reminding me that Roose Bolton was indeed poisoned by his enemies) and BZenMojo (for the theory of how King’s Landing burned).  
> To be clear, I am not in fact arguing that this work is in anyway an accurate rendition. We all watched Ramsay stab his dad. Nor is a commentary on the books of GRRM themselves, but rather on the fictional “A Song of Ice and Fire” which I am imagining as a faithful representation of “Game of Thrones” the TV show.

With the recent change in regime, the discovery of a virtually intact cache of raven scrolls left in the now-abandoned Castle Black, and the decision of Lord Gendry Baratheon XVIII to open his family’s archive of correspondence to researchers, the time is right to re-examine the events of 297 – 305 AC in the light of new information about the motivations and decisions of key actors.

This thesis will prove that “A Song Of Ice And Fire” is, rather than an objective account of the events that led to the reign of King Brandon Stark (or, as he was referred to in less enlightened times, “King Bran the Broken”), in fact a piece of propaganda designed to legitimise Stark rule and containing a number of blatant fictions as well as a pervasive bias.

For the purposes of clarity, within this text “A Song Of Ice And Fire” [SONG] will be used to refer to the text produced in the first year of the rule of King Brandon Stark. To avoid confusion, the actual conflict of the period will be referred to as “The Great Succession Crisis” [GSC]. All major actors will be referred to by the names most commonly used for them in SONG: hence, Cersei _Lannister_ rather than, more correctly, Cersei Baratheon, but Catelyn _Stark_ instead of Catelyn _Tully._  

THE BEGINNING OF THE GREAT SUCCESSION CRISIS

In SONG, the GSC is precipitated by the discovery by Lord Eddark Stark of Winterfell that the ostensible sons and heirs of King Robert Baratheon are in fact the sons of Ser Jaime Lannister, product of an incestuous and treasonous union with his twin sister Cersei.

However, if we examine the actions of Eddard Stark more closely, we can see more of his true motivation. Previously, during Robert’s Rebellion, he abandoned Robert Baratheon’s forces after the sack of King’s Landing. The explanation given by SONG that he was furious at the death of the children and wife of King Aerys is, quite plainly, implausible. An experienced soldier and commander who had learned the craft of war from the great Lord Jon Arryn would have known from the start that all heirs, and potential heirs, to King Aerys had to die for Robert Baratheon’s claim to the throne to have legal weight. In that light, his decision to leave is Eddard Stark’s first treasonous act – though far from his last.

Immediately after abandoning his King, Eddard Stark discovered that his sister Lyanna Stark had borne a son to the now-deceased Crown Prince Rhaegar Targaryen. Despite knowing King Robert wished all Targaryen heirs slain, Eddard Stark instead took the boy and raised him in secret, in Winterfell – his second treason. Plainly, his motivation was to have a potentially strong claimant to the Iron Throne on hand to influence, and to eventually use as a figurehead when he rose in rebellion against King Robert.

However, against Eddard Stark’s wishes, this boy, “Jon Snow”, joined the Night’s Watch, removing himself from the line of succession. Why he did so remains a mystery, as “Jon Snow” was rarely communicative to others about his inner motivations, but his later repeated refusals of position of authority invite speculation that Eddard Stark informed him of his parentage, and “Jon Snow” took the Black to escape becoming Eddard Stark’s puppet-king. Counter to that is his later insistence on the false claim that his parents were legally married, clear evidence that he at least wished to keep open the option becoming King.

“Jon Snow” departing for the Wall is so closely chronologically tied to Eddard Stark’s departure from Winterfell for King’s Landing it seems likely to have precipitated it. Demonstrating his political acumen and ruthlessness, Eddard Stark became Hand of the King (suggestions in SONG that King Robert chose him out of trust and friendship can be dismissed, as at this point the two men hadn’t spoken face-to-face in more than a decade). Almost immediately, Eddard Stark began to circulate the story that Crown Prince Joffrey and Prince Tommen were the illegitimate fruit of an incestuous union between the Lannister twins.

Significantly, SONG also introduces the idea of hereditary Targaryen mental instability early in the text, stating that there is a 50% chance of Targaryens succumbing to it (although in fact statistically only 6% of Targaryen rulers could be described as ‘insane’).  


	2. THE LANNISTER SLANDER

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> SONG asks us to accept the “Lannister incest” story as true, despite its unlikeliness, and portrays Eddard Stark as an honourable, if unwise, man. However, as I have shown above, Eddard Stark had not previously stopped short of treason, and had been aiming to overthrown the Baratheon line for some time.

SONG asks us to accept the “Lannister incest” story as true, despite its unlikeliness, and portrays Eddard Stark as an honourable, if unwise, man. However, as I have shown above, Eddard Stark had not previously stopped short of treason, and had been aiming to overthrown the Baratheon line for some time. What’s more, as the Baratheon archive reveals, King Robert at no time suspected that his wife was guilty of infidelity, let alone with her brother. Given the living conditions of the third century AC, it is impossible to believe the queen, of all people, could carry on a decades’ long affair without it being known to many, many people. And yet, the only sources we have for this “affair” between brother and sister are Starks: Lord Eddard Stark, who informed Stannis Baratheon; Lady Catelyn Stark, who claimed Jaime Lannister had admitted it to her while her prisoner (presumably under torture, if he even did make the statements attributed to him by Catelyn Stark); and Brandon Stark, who claimed to have witnessed it – but kept this information to himself for many years.

On the evidence available, it seems far more likely that the reality of the situation was that while Jaime Lannister was a devoted brother, the story of an incestuous relationship between him and Cersei was a vile slander which Eddard Stark started as part of a conspiracy with Stannis Baratheon (who he planned to later betray). Joffrey and Tommen were the legitimate sons of Robert Baratheon. Further, if we discount Stark evidence as biased, it is entirely plausible that while Joffrey was young and inexperienced when he took the throne after his father died in a tragic hunting accident, he was genuinely concerned for the welfare of his people, as was King Tommen after him.

After the death of King Robert, Eddard Stark attempted to seize power for himself as Regent, but King Joffrey foiled him with the help of Petyr Baelish (later betrayed by Sansa Stark and murdered by a Braavosi assassin). Eddard Stark was executed for his treason.

However, he had briefed his eldest son, Robb Stark, and his wife, Catelyn Stark, on his plan, and the GSC entered its first military phase.


	3. ROBB’S REBELLION

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> Using the excuse of Eddard Stark’s imprisonment, Robb and Catelyn Stark breached the King’s Peace by raising an army under the thin legal fiction of the obsolete title, ‘King In The North’.

Using the excuse of Eddard Stark’s imprisonment, Robb and Catelyn Stark breached the King’s Peace by raising an army under the thin legal fiction of the obsolete title, ‘King In The North’. Mother and son waged a brutal war against the Crown, resulting in the deaths of thousands of soldiers and countless civilians. Robb Stark was so callous a leader he sacrificed two thousand of his own men as a distraction while his main forces defeated and captured a badly outnumbered Jaime Lannister.

Meanwhile Stannis Baratheon, and Renly Baratheon, both called their own banners and prepared to fight for the crown.

I do not intend to rehash the military events of the War Of The Five Kings in detail, but it is worth pointing out a few incidents. Firstly, even SONG suggests that Stannis Baratheon, the man Eddard Stark wanted to make king, dabbled in dark magic and burned people alive as sacrifices. Tyrion Lannister, who was Hand of the King at the time SONG was produced and who often serves as the author’s voice within the text, subjected thousands of Baratheon soldiers and sailors to an agonizing death by wildfire. Robb Stark’s main memorable non-military actions were to firstly, break an oath of betrothal and secondly, execute his own men.

Finally, the war concludes with the death of all major protagonists. Renly Baratheon was murdered in his tent. SONG asks us to believe this was the result of ‘magic’, but it seems far more likely that Renly was slain unaware by either Catelyn Stark, known to be present, or by Brienne of Tarth, who subsequently revealed her loyalty to Catelyn Stark by swearing fealty to her.

Roose Bolton, having seen the error of his ways in breaking the King's Peace, took a necessary but unpleasant step to end Robb's Rebellion, which had left the land devastated by war and made the North vulnerable to Ironborn raiders. Subsequently, lawfully granted Winterfell by the King, and made Warden of the North, Roose Bolton must have hoped to take Winterfell peacefully, but the residents resisted to the last man and woman, and he only took the castle with great loss of life. He legitimised his son Ramsay and intelligently arranged a dynastic match between his son and Sansa Stark, hoping to bring peace and stability to the North. There is no evidence outside the text that Ramsay Bolton treated his new wife with anything but kindness, which she repaid by abandoning him, raising an army in rebellion, and finally by overthrowing him (he having become Warden of the North and Lord of Winterfell after the Stark family arranged his father’s death by poison).

Stannis Baratheon died in the North. SONG asks us to accept as plausible that an experienced military commander was defeated by the relatively inexperienced Ramsay Bolton and by poor supply lines. This is, to put it bluntly, not only far-fetched but absurd. It seems far more likely that “Jon Snow”, now Commander of the Night’s Watch and under the influence of his “half-sister” Sansa Stark, betrayed and murdered Stannis Baratheon (as no doubt Eddard Stark intended to do all along). Naturally “Jon Snow” concealed his involvement in Stannis Baratheon’s death, but his immediate flight from the Night’s Watch, to which he had sworn to serve for life, demonstrates both his lack of honour and a telling consciousness of guilt (his explanation that he had died and been resurrected we can take as the laughable fiction it clearly was).


	4. THE CLANDESTINE PHASE

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> The Great Succession Crisis goes underground.

Tragically, King Joffrey was poisoned at his wedding with poison even SONG admits was smuggled into the event by Sansa Stark. SONG asks us the believe she was merely a gullible dupe of the true murderer, but knowing Sansa Stark as she later revealed herself to be, this is difficult to believe. King Joffrey had set her aside in favour of Margery Tyrell, and by this point in the GSC Sansa Stark was married to Tyrion Lannister – a man later to play a key role in the joint Stark-Targaryen uprising. Although SONG protests the innocence of both Sansa Stark and Tyrion Lannister, there is no evidence outside that text strong enough to suggest we ignore the verdict of those who were there, that the two did indeed conspire at regicide. Sansa Stark’s immediate flight, and Tyrion Lannister’s slightly later one, suggest their guilt, and Tyrion Lannister’s almost immediate reappearance as the advisor to Queen Daenerys suggests this may have been his plan all along.

An entire separate thesis could be written on the actions and motivations of Tyrion Lannister, but here, let me pose one question for the reader. Is it possible that Tyrion Lannister was in league with the Stark family all along? If so, his arrest and abduction by Catelyn Stark was an elaborate double bluff to provoke the crown into aggressive action against the Stark forces, providing valuable propaganda to justify the Stark family’s continued treason. Certainly, he was arguably instrumental in both bringing the foreign army that ultimately subjugated Westeros, and, according to SONG, convincing “Jon Snow” to assassinate Queen Daenerys. The promptness with which King Brandon named Tyrion Lannister as Hand of the King certainly suggests that they had been working more closely together, and for longer, than SONG admits.

Regardless, despite the end of the first military phase of the GSC, the crisis continued. The brief period of stability provided by the reign of King Tommen was disrupted by continued rebellion by Catelyn Stark’s family, the Tullys. A sect of religious fanatics devoted to anarchically overturning the established order attracted sufficient followers to become a serious threat to law and order, and an attempt by the Crown to enlist them as a citizen’s militia backfired when the Queen Mother, Cersei Lannister, and the Queen, Margery Tyrell, were taken captive by the cult.

Fortunately both were able to secure their freedom, and with the bloodless defeat of the Riverland’s rebellion by crown forces under the command of Jaime Lannister, the realm seemed to be at last at peace. Even the explosion beneath the Great Sept of Baelor, causing the tragic death of many including Queen Margery, and the subsequent accidental death of King Tommen in a fall, did not precipitate another political crisis thanks to the political acumen of Cersei Lannister, who named herself Queen Cersei and kept the realm on an even keel.


	5. THE SEPT SLANDER

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> Cersei Lannister is unjustly accused of mass murder.

SONG attributes the explosion beneath the Sept to Cersei Lannister, and King Tommen’s death to suicide, but there is absolutely no forensic evidence to support either assertion, and the behaviour of both the smallfolk and the highborn in the aftermath of these events makes it clear there was not even a shadow of suspicion in contemporary minds. Queen Cersei went on to rule for two more years until deposed by Daenerys Targaryen and even SONG has to admit she faced no significant military, political or religious opposition during that time (discounting the brief and ineffectual opposition of Highgarden, whose rapid defeat and inability to even convince their own bannermen demonstrates how little conviction their rebellion carried). It is utterly implausible that after destroying the Great Sept, killing the High Septon, and assassinating many members of noble families, not to mention countless members of the other classes, Cersei Lannister would not have faced immediate reprisals, and a popular uprising. Yet even SONG can’t point to a single incident of riot or resistance. Clearly, both incidents were tragic accidents.

The most convincing argument against Queen Cersei’s involvement in the explosion beneath the Great Sept is the subsequent behaviour of her twin brother, Jaime Lannister. The author or authors of SONG devote a significant portion of the text to Jaime Lannister, clearly using him as a means to win over readers less than delighted with the new Stark regime. His ultimate defection to the Stark cause is designed as a demonstration that even a loyal Lannister can see the rightness of the Stark claim. One of the devices the text uses is to accept as truth the rumour that King Aerys planned to fire King’s Landing with wildfire and that Jaime Lannister’s famed act of “kingslaying” was in order to prevent this act. Archaeological excavations at the site of the former capital have found strong evidence that there were indeed large caches of wildfire beneath the city at this time (another strong argument that the incident at the Great Sept was an accident caused by the improper storage of this volatile substance). The Baratheon archives contain correspondence received from members of the Stark family, Tyrion Lannister, and Ser Brienne of Tarth (and copies of correspondence sent) which clearly indicate that all of those persons accepted at face value the story that Jaime Lannister saved King’s Landing by killing the king before he could use wildfire on the population.

And yet, all historical records indicate that after the explosion beneath the Great Sept, Jaime Lannister remained by his sister’s side and served as her general for another year. SONG attempts to persuade the reader that this was the result of their incestuous passion, but, as I have proved above, their sexual relationship never existed in the first place. SONG cannot have it both ways: either Jaime Lannister was a loyal Lannister who killed his king on orders from his father and had no concern for the innocent people of King’s Landing; or he was a good man whose ultimate defection to the Stark cause gives moral weight to their claims. If the latter, he would not have remained in King’s Landing and served Queen Cersei if she was responsible for the slaughter at the Great Sept. If the former, he would not ultimately have left her side to serve the Starks at Winterfell. The only conclusion is that Cersei Lannister had no involvement in the explosion beneath the Great Sept. Suggestions that she did are purely Stark propaganda, designed to position her as a ‘tyrant’ who must be defeated despite there being absolutely no evidence that the realm, or the people, suffered any significant hardship under her reign (except those hardships inflicted by the Starks and those allied with them).

Hopes of lasting stability were quickly dashed, however, as Daenerys Targaryen and her army of foreign invaders arrived in Westeros.


	6. THE DRAGON MYTH

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> The arrival of Daenerys Targaryen and her army.

According to SONG, Daenerys Targaryen was accompanied by three fully grown dragons. Now, while numerous raven scrolls and items of other correspondence from the time make reference to a dragon being present at the conquest of King’s Landing, it seems clear that despite SONG’s assertions, at no time were there three. First, the explanation of the deaths of the two dragons _not_ present at King’s Landing are absurd. All historical accounts outside the SONG describe dragons as generally invulnerable to projectile weapons due to their scales being equivalent to armour, unless hit directly in the eye, and yet SONG asks us to believe that not one but _two_ dragons were brought down by such means: one by a mysterious magical creature that there is no evidence ever existed, outside SONG’s assertions, and the other by ship-mounted ballistae.     

Clearly this is an attempt by SONG’s author or authors to, in the first case, supply an alternate explanation for the breach in the Wall that occurred while both the Wall and the North were under the control of noted Wildling-sympathiser “Jon Snow”, and in the second case, provide a post facto proximate cause for Daenerys Targaryen’s alleged war crimes.  If “Viserion” and the “Night King” did not exist, the breach in the Wall would immediately have been seen for what it was: deliberate treason by the Starks. If “Rhaegal” never existed, Daenerys Targaryen’s alleged decision to immolate the civilians of King’s Landing would seem even more unlikely than it does in the text already.

I say “if the Night King did not exist” because, outside the scattered and contradictory evidence within the text of SONG itself, there is no evidence for the existence of the “Night King”, the “Others” or “wights”. No-one besides sincere Stark loyalists is on record as having seen any of these entities, and no evidence of their existence has ever been found.

The frankly unbelievable explanation for this gap in the historical record is that each and every one of the “Undead” were destroyed when Lady Arya Stark impaled the “Night King”. Leaving aside the comprehensive absurdity of a force being a credible threat when it disintegrates with the death of its general, the account of the so-called “Long Night” in SONG shows that the enemy force, if it ever existed, was a minor threat at most. Named participants at the “Long Night” include:

  * Ser Jaime Lannister
  * Tyrion Lannister
  * Ser Davos Seaworth
  * Samwell Tarley
  * Tormund Giantsbane
  * Jon Snow
  * Jon Snow’s direwolf
  * Jorah Mormont
  * Lyanna Mormont
  * Theon Greyjoy
  * Daenerys Targaryen
  * Ser Brienne of Tarth
  * Ser Podrick Payne
  * Sansa Stark
  * Arya Stark
  * Brandon Stark
  * Grey Worm of the Unsullied
  * Missandei of Naath
  * Sandor Clegane



We are asked to believe that of all these people, in the face of an attack by many thousands of magically animated corpses that have no fear or pain, the only casualties were the heirs to Bear Island, the heir to the Iron Islands, and the Lord Commander of the Night’s Watch? (Beric Dondarrion is also named as a casualty, but as there are credible sources describing his death in combat several years earlier, this must be discounted.)

The question we must ask ourselves is, who benefits from this series of events? The answer is clear: the Starks. Without a male heir to Balon Greyjoy, the Iron Islands are open to contestation by the North. Bear Island is now available for the Starks to grant as a reward to any Lannister supporter who switches sides. And the death of the Commander of the Night’s Watch means that there are no longer witnesses to, or opponents of, the Stark-Wildling conspiracy to destroy the Wall.


	7. THE NIGHT OF THE LONG KNIVES

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> The truth about the so-called "Long Night".

It is entirely clear that the “Long Night” is a fiction invented to cover up the assassination of key figures whose death advanced Stark interests. This is only made more clear by the assertion in the text that the Dothraki were exterminated and the Unsullied decimated during the battle, only for the author to admit in subsequent chapters that they were as numerous as before. The text repeatedly describes characters as being at the point of death, overwhelmed by the Others, and yet they survive with no clear explanation why. Meanwhile, the entire battle is resolved by a Stark, with only a Stark as witness.

The only reasonable conclusion is that the so-called “Long Night” was in fact a “Night of the Long Knives”: the premeditated assassination by the Stark family of those who might prove to be a threat to them. Similarly, the depopulation of several areas in the North, which the archaeological record shows occurred at approximately this time and with great violence, was not the result of some magical attack by risen corpses, but of deliberate massacres by the Stark family and their loyalists of bannermen who had shown (justifiable) reluctance to answer the summons to Winterfell.

The question that this hypothesis raises is, why did Daenerys Targaryen travel to Winterfell to participate in the mummer’s farce of the so-called “Long Night”?

Clearly, this was against both her personal and military interest. Was she deceived by the Starks into believing the threat of the Undead existed? Or was she an active co-conspirator? The use of her dragon to destroy part of the Wall, either as collateral damage in an attack on the Night’s Watch or in a deliberate move to allow the Wildling allies of “Jon Snow” easier access to the lands south of the Wall, suggests she was an active participant in at least part of the ruthless subjugation of the North. Certainly, the outcome was the addition of Northern forces to her armies, and the support of the Warden of the North of her claim to the Iron Throne. It is debatable if this slight military advantage was worth delaying her conquest in the South, but it is possible that Daenerys Targaryen was not particularly intelligent. In truth, we will never know her reasons or motivations.


	8. THE NORTHERN SUBJUGATION OF THE SOUTH

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> The Starks move against DaenerysTargaryen

The Winnowing of the North complete, the Stark-Targaryen allies turned their attention South. Here we come to the most implausible parts of the text. I have already discussed the invention of “Rhaegal”, whose far-fetched death is designed to make readers more easily swallow the idea that Daenerys Targaryen is becoming increasingly unhinged. SONG further telegraphs this by having her key advisors repeatedly suggest that she is showing signs of hereditary mental illness, although it weakens its case for this by portraying her as behaving largely rationally.

According to SONG, at Winterfell, “Jon Snow” informed Daenerys Targaryen that he was the legitimate son of Rhaegar Targaryen, and she immediately began to be concerned about his loyalty and the loyalty of the Starks. This shows that Daenerys Targaryen was, at that point, thinking clearly and rationally. First of all, as she knew, Rhaegar Targaryen had been married to Elia Martell, who had borne him two children, proof that the marriage had been consummated and making a nonsense of claims it had been “secretly annulled”. When “Jon Snow” claimed to be Rhaegar Targaryen’s _legitimate_ son, it was a clear signal that he coveted the Iron Throne: if, as SONG repeatedly insists, he didn’t want it, he would have simply told the truth – which was that his parents had never been legally married, and he had no claim to the Throne. 

Next, Daenerys Targaryen is shown to be increasingly suspicious of the true motives of those around her, criticising their poor advice and fearing betrayal. Again, this is supposed to be a thematic echo of the stated behaviour of her father, King Aerys, who was well documented to be paranoid. However, again, SONG undercuts its own argument, as it can’t conceal that her advisors have been _repeatedly_ giving her poor advice and _are_ plotting to betray her. “Jon Snow” and the Starks, as shown above, but also Varys, demonstrated to be part of the Stark conspiracy by broadcasting the lie of his legitimacy, and Tyrion Lannister, whose advice and judgement to this point have been so laughably bad that the only plausible explanation is that he has been actively working against her all along, probably at the instigation of Sansa Stark.  

Finally, the execution of Missandei of Naath on the walls of King’s Landing is presented as the final inciting incident for Daenerys Targaryen to suffer a severe mental health breakdown. However, this event is presented so implausibly that it is almost certainly fabricated out of whole cloth. Why would Cersei Lannister, whose own father arranged the death of key enemies under guest-right in an effort to end the bloodshed and suffering of the Riverlands during Robb’s Rebellion, respect a flag of parlay? Why would the woman who, SONG insists, put a bounty on Tyrion Lannister’s head on multiple occasions, hesitate at having him shot? And what sane person, in possession of a hostage highly valued by a woman with a dragon at her disposal, kills that hostage in a petty display of spite? It is inconceivable that, if Cersei Lannister had acted as SONG depicts her acting in this scene, those around her would not have immediately removed her from authority for mental instability.  

The only possibly conclusion is that this parlay incident did not occur. Missandei of Naath disappears from SONG’s narrative at this time, but we can only say that her fate remains unknown.

At this point, the text becomes so incoherent that the author or authors clearly simply gave up on any attempt to make the Stark rise to power plausible and instead simply sought to justify it _ex post facto_ with a series of bald assertions about the actions of key characters that make no sense at all given what SONG has previously told us. Even within the biased context of SONG’s pro-Stark narrative, Jaime Lannister has been presented as a man who cares about innocent life and Tyrion Lannister as intelligent. Yet now SONG tries to convince us of the opposite. For much of its earlier pages, SONG depicts the brutal cost of war on civilians, yet now it attempts to insist that experienced and battle-hardened commanders were under the illusion that taking King’s Landing with conventional forces would be a largely bloodless affair for non-combatants.


	9. THE FIRING OF KING’S LANDING

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> The likely true culprit of the war crime committed in the Stark conquest of King's Landing.

Most egregiously, SONG depicts Daenerys Targaryen making a split-second decision to burn King’s Landing to rubble _after_ the city signals surrender by ringing the bells. Leaving aside the vexed question of how the citizens knew to use that signal, given that bells had never been known to mean surrender, this makes no sense even in the context of the various motivations SONG confusingly attempts to give to her. If she has succumbed to hereditary mental illness, massacring those who have submitted to her and live in a city she is in control of are the exact opposite of the way SONG has presented “Targaryen madness” through the examples of her father and brother. If her actions are supposedly consistent with her previous tendency to cruelty (as the SONG text directly proposes through Tyrion Lannister) the text fails to present any evidence that she views innocent civilians as akin to slavers, rapists, and enemy soldiers. If, as SONG then tries to argue, Daenerys Targaryen is so invested in her persona of a “liberator” that she will show no mercy to anyone who resists her, this still fails to explain why she took the decision to kill hundreds of thousands of people who had just explicitly submitted to her.

We can only conclude that, in truth, the Firing of King’s Landing was not the work of Daenerys Targaryen, but of Tyrion Lannister. Even SONG is forced to admit that Tyrion had wished the population of King’s Landing dead previously. He knew about the wildfire caches beneath the city. He was clearly part of the Stark conspiracy, and given the outcome of almost every action he has taken or advice he has given has been to weaken or delay Daenerys Targaryen’s war for the Iron Throne, he can plausibly be said to have been covertly working against her from the beginning.

The best theory for what happened is that Stark forces, knowing of the wildfire from Tyrion Lannister, fired the city after surrender to frame Daenerys Targaryen and provide an excuse for her subsequent planned assassination.  Seen in this light, Tyrion Lannister’s decision to free his brother Jaime Lannister and send him into the city to retrieve their sister makes sense: Jaime Lannister’s death made Tyrion Lannister Lord of Casterly Rock.


	10. THE FINAL STAGE

**Summary for the Chapter:**

> The Starks triumphant.

Clearly the Stark plan worked. There was so little protest at the murder of Queen Daenerys Targaryen that even her most loyal soldiers merely imprisoned Jon Snow for several weeks. Her bloodriders did not attempt to avenge her. It seems from SONG, her name was never mentioned again.

Within weeks, the long-ago plans of Lord Eddard Stark finally bore fruit. His son was King of Westeros, his daughter was Queen in the North, and his nephew Lord Commander of the Night’s Watch (clearly merely a ploy to allow “Jon Snow” to organise the Wildlings into an illegal military force the Starks could use to crush any opposition).  In another scene so implausible it cannot be read as a serious attempt at a historical record, SONG proposes that a random bunch of Lords unanimously agreed to this outcome. Clearly, if that occurred, SONG omits to mention that their families were being held hostage in exchange for their compliance, or their lives were threatened, or some other explanation for why neither Dorne nor the Iron Islands sought to follow Sansa Stark’s example and demand their own independence. It is also a possiblity that word of the Winnowing of the North had spread, and those present had justifiable fear of the Stark’s proven ruthless brutality.

CONCLUSION

We can only hope that in the future, more great families will follow the example of Lord Gendry Baratheon XVIII and open their personal archives to researchers, and that one day, the full truth will be known. For now, though, all we can conclude is that the partial, biased account written to legitimate King Brandon Stark’s rule fails to achieve its goal, due to the sheer implausibility of the final chapters.


End file.
